Metaschema documentation - Forum - OpenEdge RDBMS - Progress Community

Metaschema documentation

 Forum

Metaschema documentation

  • I'm currently poking around in the metaschema, which I haven't done in a while and I am seeing a bunch of stuff that I don't remember having seen before.   I don't suppose all this is documented anywhere?

    For example, there are a whole bunch of fields in _Field that start with "For".  Does this have to do with DataServer schema?  Or what?

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • Hi Thomas,

    Rob posted an idea that could more or less be related to your request. Here it is:

    https://community.progress.com/community_groups/products_enhancements/i/openedge_database_enhancements_-_tell_us_what_youd_like_to_see/system_table_descriptions.aspx

  • That would be a start ... and should have been done a long time ago, but some real documentation wouldn't hurt.

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • The fields in _Field ending in SA are another group with mysterious purpose, especially with widths of "X(6)"

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • yes.

  • Yes to the DataServer question?  Or yes to it is documented "somewhere"?

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • Yes it's mysterious. :)

    If I recall the _File._For-* fields are used by dataservers.  I assume it's the same for _Field._For-* as well.

  • I have a vague recollection that (at least some of) this stuff was documented in the Engine Crew/Room Monographs that were once upon a time on the PEG. They seem not to be there any more though.
     
    But to the best of my knowledge, the metaschema was never formally documented (deliberately, IIRC).
     
    -- peter
     
    From: Rob Fitzpatrick [mailto:bounce-robfsit@community.progress.com]
    Sent: Thursday, 20 March, 2014 10:13
    To: TU.OE.RDBMS@community.progress.com
    Subject: RE: Metaschema documentation
     
    Reply by Rob Fitzpatrick

    Yes it's mysterious. :)

    If I recall the _File._For-* fields are used by dataservers.  I assume it's the same for _Field._For-* as well.

    Stop receiving emails on this subject.

    Flag this post as spam/abuse.

  • Lack of documentation is not friendly to tool developers like myself.

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • Thomas Mercer-Hursh

    The fields in _Field ending in SA are another group with mysterious purpose, especially with widths of "X(6)"

    SA = String Attribute - should it be U / T30 etc 

  • How about those which follow the pattern _Has-Ccnstrs for _File?

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • The other question, which I recognize that no one probably has the answer to, is whether these fields are actually used, regardless of what they are theoretically for.   If 99% of all databases will never have anything non-default in the field, then there is little reason for me, as a tool creator, to spend any effort supporting them.

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • Are the -MiscN fields assumed to be for users or do PSC products use them?  How about ResN fields?

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • And Attributes.

    Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice  http://www.cintegrity.com

  • Thomas Mercer-Hursh

    The other question, which I recognize that no one probably has the answer to, is whether these fields are actually used, regardless of what they are theoretically for.   If 99% of all databases will never have anything non-default in the field, then there is little reason for me, as a tool creator, to spend any effort supporting them.

    The SA fields are used when compiling with languages option and with translation database connected.